Piper's daughter or not???

[pipercharmedphreak]

here it is a place to debate whether the girl in the series finale was piper's daughter or not.. i personally think it was!!

[bakinator321]

i think it was because all of the other sisters had three children so that would mean that she should have and pipper saw that she had a daughter wen she went 2 the future in 'morality bites'

[Esmeralda]

Well, I don't think Morality Bites has much to do with it, since that's a future that also includes Prue, but I agree that Kern was dumb enough to give all three sisters three kids, so that makes the little girl Piper's daughter. I was just disappointed that she was still named Melinda in Kern's script. I thought Piper would've named her Prue.

[Flame]

Are you all talking about the girl who was reading the book and shut the door at the end ?

[MarAcev]

No, that was Piper's grand-daugther. We're talking about the little girl in this scene:

[vandergraafk]

Why is this even being debated? Mr. Kern ended speculation months ago when he indicated that the girl shutting the door was named Prudence. Moreover, in the Official Companion Volume 2, we learned that Piper had three children. The daughter receiving lunch was indeed Prudence Melinda. The only non-sensical retort was that the somehow the official companion is not canon. How anyone can maintain that position is beyond my ability to comprehend. If you wish to review all of the speculation that was written prior to Mr. Kern's acknowledgement in Charmed magazine, as well as what appeared in the official companion, then look through the pages of commentary that appeared in the Forever Charmed thread.

[Esmeralda]

Well, I wish Kern would end the speculation by letting us know that IF he added Prudence Melinda to Leo and Wyatt's family, why the heck wasn't she on the !@#$%^&*()_)(*&^%$#@! picture wall at the end, and if they didn't have the money to put her up there, why the heck didn't he just end the show with Piper's granddaughter Prue closing the door, the way Piper's Big Sister Prue closed the door in the first episode. Or why he didn't have Wyatt and Chris even mention her.

[vandergraafk]

He did. Prudence closes the door at the end of Forever Charmed. That was disclosed in Charmed magazine. Whether it was Chris's or Wyatt's daughter is unknown.

As for Prudence Melinda, that was resolved in The Book of Three, volume 2.

What more is required?

[starr]

I think it was Piper and Leo's daughter. It's the only answer that makes sense.

[pipercharmedphreak]

vandergraafk is right! but some people still dont believe that so.. we are having this conversation!

[ShantaD]

vandergraafk said:

Why is this even being debated? Mr. Kern ended speculation months ago when he indicated that the girl shutting the door was named Prudence. Moreover, in the Official Companion Volume 2, we learned that Piper had three children. The daughter receiving lunch was indeed Prudence Melinda. The only non-sensical retort was that the somehow the official companion is not canon. How anyone can maintain that position is beyond my ability to comprehend. If you wish to review all of the speculation that was written prior to Mr. Kern's acknowledgement in Charmed magazine, as well as what appeared in the official companion, then look through the pages of commentary that appeared in the Forever Charmed thread.

There's nothing really at all to indicate that was Piper's daughter. And no, that companion is not canon and has nothing to do with the show. Some of it's so-called facts were taken from draft scripts, speculation and personal interpretions. There's far more reason to believe that girl was not Piper's daughter than that she was. Except for those who like to jump to conclusions: we see a girl walking out the door behind Chris and Wyatt = it must be Piper's daughter. That logic will get you flunked out of school fast. Ask for actual proof? There's none at all.

Charmed was shoddily written and full of inconsistencies, but at least I'm still basing my opinions on what actually aired, and not on "companion" volumes or draft scripts full of discarded lines and deleted scenes. Kern says "Kill Billie 2" was re-written at the last minute. Is canon what aired or the original script? The line from the script where Piper states she had a daughter Prudence Melinda was cut from the show. Why? Except to leave it purposely ambiguous. The show is what made it into the final aired episode. That's pretty much common sense to most people.

[Esmeralda]

shantad said:

vandergraafk said:

Why is this even being debated? Mr. Kern ended speculation months ago when he indicated that the girl shutting the door was named Prudence. Moreover, in the Official Companion Volume 2, we learned that Piper had three children. The daughter receiving lunch was indeed Prudence Melinda. The only non-sensical retort was that the somehow the official companion is not canon. How anyone can maintain that position is beyond my ability to comprehend. If you wish to review all of the speculation that was written prior to Mr. Kern's acknowledgement in Charmed magazine, as well as what appeared in the official companion, then look through the pages of commentary that appeared in the Forever Charmed thread.

There's nothing really at all to indicate that was Piper's daughter. And no, that companion is not canon and has nothing to do with the show. Some of it's so-called facts were taken from draft scripts, speculation and personal interpretions. There's far more reason to believe that girl was not Piper's daughter than that she was. Except for those who like to jump to conclusions: we see a girl walking out the door behind Chris and Wyatt = it must be Piper's daughter. That logic will get you flunked out of school fast. Ask for actual proof? There's none at all.

Charmed was shoddily written and full of inconsistencies, but at least I'm still basing my opinions on what actually aired, and not on "companion" volumes or draft scripts full of discarded lines and deleted scenes. Kern says "Kill Billie 2" was re-written at the last minute. Is canon what aired or the original script? The line from the script where Piper states she had a daughter Prudence Melinda was cut from the show. Why? Except to leave it purposely ambiguous. The show is what made it into the final aired episode. That's pretty much common sense to most people.

I agree totally. Because Kern never had the characters say the name "Prudence Melinda" for the daughter or "Prue" for the granddaughter, then we can debate whether those are actually the names or not. And as long as you have that !@#$%^%$#@! wall as canon, then there's no way that either of those two truly exist outside of Piper's imagination--had they, they would undoubtedly be on the wall. So according to the wall, Piper had no daughter (she'd be on the wall) no grandchildren (we'd see them on the wall), Chris and Wyatt never got married (we'd see their wedding pictures on the wall), Phoebe and Paige and their family never lived passed their kids being very young (you wouldn't just see Phoebe and Paige as young on the wall), so the girl we see with the lunchbox is probably one of Phoebe's or one of Paige's and a cousin, not a sister.

And I'm making myself sick typing this, because it just shows how absolutely stupid that wall was!

[Stormythomas]

shantad said:

vandergraafk said:

Why is this even being debated? Mr. Kern ended speculation months ago when he indicated that the girl shutting the door was named Prudence. Moreover, in the Official Companion Volume 2, we learned that Piper had three children. The daughter receiving lunch was indeed Prudence Melinda. The only non-sensical retort was that the somehow the official companion is not canon. How anyone can maintain that position is beyond my ability to comprehend. If you wish to review all of the speculation that was written prior to Mr. Kern's acknowledgement in Charmed magazine, as well as what appeared in the official companion, then look through the pages of commentary that appeared in the Forever Charmed thread.

There's nothing really at all to indicate that was Piper's daughter. And no, that companion is not canon and has nothing to do with the show. Some of it's so-called facts were taken from draft scripts, speculation and personal interpretions. There's far more reason to believe that girl was not Piper's daughter than that she was. Except for those who like to jump to conclusions: we see a girl walking out the door behind Chris and Wyatt = it must be Piper's daughter. That logic will get you flunked out of school fast. Ask for actual proof? There's none at all.

To me it seems logical that some people would come to that conclusion (we see a girl walking out the door behind Chris and Wyatt = it must be Piper's daughter). Even if you don't agree that it's 'logical' I'm sure you can understand why some people would look at that scene and think: ummm....maybe that's Piper's daughter. I mean she's there with the whole halliwell-wyatt family (in the morning) going off to school with Chris and Wyatt. How could the idea of it might being Piper's daughter not come to mind? And who else could she be? A cousin? How does that make any sense? So the writers where thinking what?.....Oh, I know let's add a cousin to Piper's scene with her immediate family just because.

Okay so even if you don't agree that it's Piper's daughter, I'm sure you can understand why someone would at least assume it was (whether assuming is logical or not. Or as you claim: a great why to flunk highschool). In which case, the writers/producers/whatever must have known someone (never the less many charmed fans) would come to assume it was Piper's daughter. And in knowing this what other reason would they have for keeping the scene as is, if not because they wanted people to assume it was Piper's daughter.

And it's really not believable to claim that that idea (that some people would assume it was Piper's daughter) never crossed writer/producer/whatever's mind. It must have. I mean look at how many fans came to that conclusion.

esmeralda said:

I agree totally. Because Kern never had the characters say the name "Prudence Melinda" for the daughter or "Prue" for the granddaughter, then we can debate whether those are actually the names or not. And as long as you have that !@#$%^%$#@! wall as canon, then there's no way that either of those two truly exist outside of Piper's imagination--had they, they would undoubtedly be on the wall. So according to the wall, Piper had no daughter (she'd be on the wall) no grandchildren (we'd see them on the wall), Chris and Wyatt never got married (we'd see their wedding pictures on the wall), Phoebe and Paige and their family never lived passed their kids being very young (you wouldn't just see Phoebe and Paige as young on the wall), so the girl we see with the lunchbox is probably one of Phoebe's or one of Paige's and a cousin, not a sister.

And I'm making myself sick typing this, because it just shows how absolutely stupid that wall was!

I couldn't agree more. The wall is stupid (or at least has become a stupid agrument). The "wall" was used as a 'memory lane.' It showed the charmed characters (the halliwells) that we, the fans, had come to know and love (besides Prue...but I think we all know that back story to that). It would have been really stupid, imo, to have some strange woman to stand in as a picture of Melinda. We never meet Melinda. The wall was for character the fans knew.

But I mean really if you want her to be a cousin then whatever...let her be one. If you want her to be Melinda then whatever....let her be her. Personally I think it was fully intended for her to be Melinda, however I live in my own reality (and always seem to contradict myself) and will continue pretending it was a cousin. Because I wish it was.

[Esmeralda]

Using the wall as "memory lane" featuring the ones we know would've been perfect IF they'd used it BEFORE we saw what happened in the future and IF they hadn't shown Old Piper and Old Leo in front of it. Prue-fans still would've screamed bloody murder (and rightfully so--if she had her mother and grandmother on the wall, no WAY Piper wouldn't have her best friend, the one *SHE* always called the best, on that wall!), but it would've at least made sense. It made none coming after the future since those who were shown in the future should've been part of the wall. Just showing Old Piper and Old Leo going up the stairs would've made more sense.

Or better. Old Piper and Old Leo go up the stairs. The kids open up the Book. The front of the Book shows the pictures we saw on the wall, including an extra, one of Piper and Leo on their wedding day. THEN we could've simply seen the ones we know (again with every Prue-fan going nuts because she's not part of it when she so-very-much-should've been--GRRR at Kern & Shannen!) as we know them, and it would've made sense. Because the kids don't go beyond the picture of Wyatt and Chris as teenagers, (yes, I know Chris said he was in his 20's--like most of his lies, I don't believe him, so to me he and Wyatt are teenagers in that picture) we never see anything beyond, so the ones we saw in the future are there, just farther in the Book.

But I agree totally with you, Stormy. Because Kern never actually had anyone call the daughter/cousin and granddaughter by name (stupid on his part, but why change during the finale?? After all, of 9 grandchildren (8, if you think the girl is a cousin), and HOW many grandkids, the only names we ever learned were the boys--Henry, Jr, Wyatt, Chris and grandson Matthew), no matter what he planned and no matter what he says afterwards, each fan is welcomed to believe that the little girl is Piper's daughter (and her name is either Prue or Melinda or something else like Patty or Penny or ....) or a cousin, and that the granddaughter with the TK is Chris' daughter or Wyatt's or the daughter's (and her name is Prue or Melinda or Bianca or Christina or Piper Leonora or Victoria or....) and that fan is just as right as anyone else.

So vandergraafk is right! Why debate it?? (Besides the fact that it's fun! )

[vandergraafk]

"There's nothing really at all to indicate that was Piper's daughter. And no, that companion is not canon and has nothing to do with the show. Some of it's so-called facts were taken from draft scripts, speculation and personal interpretions (sic)."

Well, ShantaD, the above is an excerpt from what YOU wrote. I'll spare everyone the diatribe that you used to denigrate those who disagree with your "authoritative" gobbledygook and confine myself to an analysis of this statement.

You claim that "there's nothing really at all to indicate that it (sic) was Piper's daughter". Yet, there's absolutely nothing to suggest that it wasn't. The only positive point raised, a weak and nonsensical one at that, was that perhaps it was Phoebe's daughter enjoying a stay-over with Auntie Piper. How silly is that claim?

No, there's plenty of reason to accept this as Piper's daughter. You may disdain anything that didn't air and you've yet to adequately address the question of character thoughts completed by other characters in order to ascertain whether that's part of your extremely narrow and myopic view of canon, but when Mr. Kern, who surely knows more about this than you, explains who the grand-daughter is and an official - as opposed to unauthorized or speculative - companion says so, then that's pretty strong evidence. You would be foolish to ignore it. Worse would be to dismiss it in the extremely uncompromising and disdainful tone you employ.

[Esmeralda]

vandergraafk said:

"There's nothing really at all to indicate that was Piper's daughter. And no, that companion is not canon and has nothing to do with the show. Some of it's so-called facts were taken from draft scripts, speculation and personal interpretions (sic)."

Well, ShantaD, the above is an excerpt from what YOU wrote. I'll spare everyone the diatribe that you used to denigrate those who disagree with your "authoritative" gobbledygook and confine myself to an analysis of this statement.

You claim that "there's nothing really at all to indicate that it (sic) was Piper's daughter". Yet, there's absolutely nothing to suggest that it wasn't. The only positive point raised, a weak and nonsensical one at that, was that perhaps it was Phoebe's daughter enjoying a stay-over with Auntie Piper. How silly is that claim?

No, there's plenty of reason to accept this as Piper's daughter. You may disdain anything that didn't air and you've yet to adequately address the question of character thoughts completed by other characters in order to ascertain whether that's part of your extremely narrow and myopic view of canon, but when Mr. Kern, who surely knows more about this than you, explains who the grand-daughter is and an official - as opposed to unauthorized or speculative - companion says so, then that's pretty strong evidence. You would be foolish to ignore it. Worse would be to dismiss it in the extremely uncompromising and disdainful tone you employ.

Sorry, V. Your response is just as uncompromising and said in just as a disdainful tone as ShantaD's. If you wish to accept Kern's words as canon, that's your choice, but I do believe you're in the minority. For most fans of most TV shows (not just Charmed), the only thing that counts as canon is what is actually shown on the show; the rest is fanon, or in the case of the writers/producers/etc, speculation and not much else. So just because Kern says he *meant* for someone to be someone or that it's shown in the scripts or teasers or anything else, that does *not* make it canon--what was on the screen in the final cut is canon. So the fact that he never had Piper say she had a daughter (and does ANYONE think she wouldn't of if she was actually writing what happens? That makes as much sense as not having Prue on the wall or the daughter on the wall or the granddaughter on the wall!), allows anyone to think that the little girl we see is *not* Piper's (I personally think she is, but that's coz I think Kern was stupid enough to actually think three sisters would each have three kids) or the fact that Piper never calls the granddaughter by name means that her name was NOT necessarily Prue.

Now I agree that not accepting the girl as Piper's daughter simply because someone doesn't think Wyatt or Chris should have a sister, because then she should be part of any spinoff and they don't want her to be part of one (and I know that's a lot of fans' reason for not accepting her) is one made from emotions, not logic, and hence not truly valid. But if they use logic, they can come up with just as many valid reasons to show that she *is* Piper's daughter than to show that she isn't. It's back to *very* shoddy writing/editing by Kern! And the fact that he tries to change that by writing stuff in the magazines does NOT change that fact!

[vandergraafk]

To the extent that I am deeply irritated by the failure of theologists to draw a narrow line around Charmedverse and react to this with disgust and disdain is obvious. What you fail to see is that your definition of "canon" as you call it is not as straightforward and rigid as it seems. As I have argued before, those advocating "canon" take an extremely literalist interpretaton of Charmedverse. That stance, however uncompromising it is, begs the question that I raised before which neither you nor ShantaD choose to answer, namely,

IF IT WAS NOT SAID OR SHOWN ON TV, DOES IT EXIST IN CHARMEDVERSE?

From your comments, I take it the answer is a resounding no. But, I am willing to consider a response, but 0ne never seems forthcoming.

Why does this matter? First, we have spent oodles of time and space "debating" the events of Oh My Goddess. Would Paige have died had Chris not rescued her? The discussion goes round in circles - or, should I say, remains locked in trench warfare, because of those theologians who refuse to even consider the possibility since it "NEVER HAPPENED ON SCREEN". Well, if that's the case, then none of the theologians truly understands how scripts are written and crafted on TV. There are many, many instances in Charmed where one character finishes another character's thoughts. Charmed and Dangerous is full of these. Maybe that's because Breen and Schapsker chose to write in that style (it was prevalent as long as they were around), but for a literalist if it WASN'T ARTICULATED, THEN IT WASN'T SAID can be the only response. How logical is that?

Now, I may be as uncompromising as you suggest I am. I probably am in large part because of my training in French literature. Any analyst cherishes the opportunity to impose order and consider a variety of "texts" in order to support that interpretation. Some even go far as to read between the lines or analyze what's not been written (SEMIOTICS). I won't go that far since much of that is purely speculative. Still, the onus i8s on any analyst to provide support for a given point of view.

With respect to this issue, I emphatically state that the "NOT PIPER"S DAUGHTER" camp has absolutely nothing to offer in support of its thesis. The one crude interpretation that was offered early on, namely, that Phoebe's daughter was having a sleep-over where there are no other girls apparently present seems hogwash since it makes absolutely no sense. Esmeralda now dismisses yet another argument as being equally if not more silly than the former.

At best, the "NOT PIPER'S DAUGHTER" camp can assert without substantian or any evidence apart from the theological canon nonsense that they are correct. We, in the oppsoing camp, can point to a variety of sources that strongly support our interpretation. You can choose to believe what you want, but you are not warding off "fanon" - whatever that is - but engaging in religion. We may be heathen, but then we're witches, aren't we?

[Esmeralda]

The canon is that Piper did NOT mention having a daughter and did NOT have her on the wall. There is no way you can disagree with that, because it's fact. As I said, I *do* believe that she was supposed to be Piper's daughter (although her name is totally up in the air), but I *do* believe that the "she isn't Piper's daughter" camp are just as much in the right as we who say she is are, because we are never told that she is. Again, shoddy writing/editing by Kern allows any fan to decide whatever s/he want, the same way if Kern meant for her to be Piper's daughter, that's fine for him, but that does not make it canon, because he did not make it part of the show, the same way any fan can give the granddaughter any name they want and give Phoebe's daughters and Paige's daughters any name they want, no matter if Kern had names in mind or not.

For me, Phoebe's daughters are Patty, Prue & Penny; Paige's twins are Charlotte & Cassandra; Piper's daughter is Melinda (since she's younger than Phoebe's Prue) and Piper's granddaughter is Chris & Bianca's daughter Prue, so it's Prue who closes the door, but that's MY fanon, and anyone can use MY fanon in their own fics and I'm thrilled! But if anyone else calls them anything else (including saying that Melinda has a different name and she's Phoebe or Paige's or including Bianca as Chris' wife or not), then they are just as right as I am. When you come to fanon (which is anything that is NOT on the screen), no one is wrong. Period. Well, except maybe Kern for doing such a horrid job with the finale!

[vandergraafk]

Your definition of canon is hardly a definition. What you are engaging in is semiotics. That is, because something is NOT said speaks volumes. Read again what you wrote. You highlight the fact that Piper DID NOT say or do, etc. And you conveniently ignore the one instance where Piper DOES dole out an ostensible school lunch to each of her children.

For some obscure, and probably culturally dtermined reason, you assume that all opinions are created equal when nothing of the sort can truly ever be proven. It's a question of evidence. There's more to support the Piper's Daughter camp and hardly any to support the NOT PIPER's DAUGHTER view.

But, if you want to engage in religion, that's fine by me. I choose to be a witch! Unfortunately, you choose to construct a stark alternative: canon vs. fanon. Your undefined canon you assert by fiat is LAW, while fanon is OPINION and everyone's entitled to an opinion. Unfortunately, you fail - despite my repeated request to answer the question I posed boldly in vivacious color. Until you do, your canon will remain as slippery as an eel. Its use will be limited to shooting down the reasoned analysis of writers such as me who actually look for the middle ground between your extremes of canon and fanon. I'm sorry but that's why the academic life is both fascinating and frustration for many would be students.

[spiritsas]

E-
I'm going to have to go with V on this one for two reasons, which he has already stated and which we do see on the show. One is the lunch doling and leaving for school (presumably) scene and the other is that we get to see Phoebe's children and Paiges. It makes sense that the children we see with Piper and Leo are all theirs. Anything else is just a far less likely supposition.

This is confirmed by the show's Executive Producer who wrote the episode. Are you going to tell the writer what they really meant in their own story? You would have to admit that's being not only a bit presumptuous but a little bit arrogant in believing you know better what he was thinking than Kern does. I know you're not saying that V is incorrect about it being Piper's daughter. That's not the point. The point is that the writer himself has confirmed what many people thought. I'm not sure why this is not enough for anyone to accept this. People can think whatever they want, but that doesn't give it credence just because they want to believe it's true. The lack of a specific picture being shown in not evidence to the contrary. They simply did not show every picture on the wall. For whatever reason Kern and SD had for not talking about her making an appearance, using her picture would have cost the show tens of thousands of dollars.

One last thing. Not everyone thinks Kern did a terrible job with the finale. If leaving SD out makes it terrible, then that's one opinion. I for one liked the ending for a number of reasons. It closed a number of loops and left open a number of possible ideas for spin-offs, not that we'll be seeing any of them any time soon. It was not the best Charmed episode ever, but it was well acted, had as many of the old recurring cast members as was possible for the two hours (if you include Kill Billie Vol 2, which Kern said was the first part of a two part finale), and finished the story up nicely for the sisters. There are things which were never addressed, true, but I think the important points were covered.

For me, the issue of Piper's daughter, is a closed issue. Asked and answered, completely.